Dr. B. It was worse. It was actually pusillanimous. He deplored his fall in the most desponding and lamentable terms. He complained of false friends, of an ungrateful country, of the utter ruin of all his worldly prospects. His friends were forced to admonish him sometimes to rouse his courage, and remember his former character. Nay, to such an extent was this feeling carried, that Atticus even wrote him word, of a report having reached the Roman capital, that his affliction had disordered his senses.1 The truth is, the excessive vanity of the man had received so rude and severe a shock, as almost to unsettle his intellect; and he who had fondly hoped, that his name and services would remain ever fresh and undying in the memory of his countrymen, could hardly believe that he was now an exile and fugitive from the very country he had saved. H. But his return, Docter, do tell me of that. Dr. B. Ah! that was indeed a glorious era in his existence. The account of it is given by Cicero himself. The whole Appian Way, from Brundisium to Rome, appeared but one continued street, lined on both sides with crowds of men, women, and children. Nor was there a præfecture, town, or colony, which did not send deputations to congratulate him on his return. What Cicero himself says, was, as Plutarch remarks, even less than the truth, that all Italy brought him back upon its shoulders. "That one day,” observes the orator, "was worth an immortality; when, on my approach towards the city, the senate came out to receive me, followed by the whole number of citizens, as if Rome itself had left its foundations and marched forward to embrace its pre server. H. For what length of time had Cicero remained in exile, Doctor Barton ? Dr. B. He was recalled sixteen months after his departure from Rome; but he did not exactly re-enter the city until seventeen had elapsed. The law for his recall from exile was passed on the 4th of August, and the day of his return was the 4th of September. H. And where was Clodius, Doctor, during the period that elapsed after Cicero's restoration? Dr. B. Doing every thing in his power to raise fresh tumults against him, and daily committing new outrages, until an end was put to his evil career by the swords of Milo's followers. - Cicero, after his return from exile, devoted himself for several years to the affairs of his numerous clients; and it was during this period that the celebrated trial of Milo took place, for the killing of Clodius, when the orator, intimidated by the display of a military force, and the outcries of the factious, made but a weak and ineffectual defence. H. Cicero was no very great admirer, I believe, of warlike movements. Dr. B. Why, when an occasion offered, and he was compelled to act, he conducted himself in a manner far from discreditable. I will cite you an instance. Pompey, in order to check more effectually the prac tice of bribery, had procured the passing of a law, by which all future 1 Ep. ad Fam. 14, 4.-Ep. ad Att. 3, 13. 2 Or. in Pis. 22.-Post. Red. in Sen. 15.- Pro Sext. 63. consuls and prætors were disqualified from holding any province, till five years after the expiration of their magistracies, and, that there might be a supply of governors during this interval of five years, the senators of consular and prætorian rank, who had never held any foreign command, were to divide the vacant provinces among themselves by lot. Cicero, in consequence of this, obtained the government of Cilicia,1 a province which included also Pisidia, Pamphylia, and three districts of Asia, together with the island of Cyprus. At the head of two legions he defeated the Parthians, who had advanced as far as Antioch; and then turning his arms against the inhabitants of the mountains, an untamed race of banditti, who had never acknowledged the Roman sway, he took two of their towns, Erana and Pindenissus, the latter their capital, and which cost him a six weeks' siege, and in testimony of his success was saluted by his soldiers with the title of Imperator.2 He would have obtained a triumph also, had not the troubled state of affairs at home prevented one from being conferred. H. The troubles to which you allude were those no doubt which attended the commencement of the civil contest. How did he act during their continuance? Dr. B. In the first outbreaking of this memorable war, Cæsar and Pompey were both anxious to gain over a man whose good opinion was so important as Cicero's. The orator regarded the cause of Pompey as that of the republic; he disapproved of every thing which had been done for the increase of Cæsar's power; but yet he plainly foresaw, that a collision between these two commanders would end in the ruin of the republican party. Hence the indecision which marked his conduct, and necessarily embroiled him with both. During the space of five months he was debating within himself whether he should follow Pompey and the senate into Epirus, or remain in Italy. At last he decided for the first of these courses, and joined Pompey at Dyrrhachium.3 Scarcely, however, had he taken this step, when he began to repent of it. He did not present himself at the battle of Pharsalia, a sickness, real or pretended, having confined him at Dyrrhachium, where Cato was encamped with fifteen cohorts. When the issue of the conflict was known, Cato offered to Cicero, as a personage of consular rank, the command of the forces. He declined, and recommended an accommodation, a step which nearly cost him his life at the hands of the son of Pompey. Returning upon this abruptly to Italy, he found in this country a safe conduct sent unto him by Cæsar, who was then in Egypt, and couched in the most honourable terms." H. Ah, it was this that Grant, of New College, showed me yesterday, at the Bodleian, in a volume of Fabricius, beginning with the words, "M. Tullium Ciceronem, ob egregias ejus virtutes," &c.—The 1 Ep. ad Att. 5, 15.-Ibid. 5, 17. 2 Ep. ad Fam. 15, 1.—Ibid. 15, 4. 6 Ep. ad Fam. 14, 23. 7 G. Fabric. Antiq. Mon. Insig. career of the orator is now drawing to a close. Doctor, and I will only beg of you to give me a rapid sketch of his history, that we may pass on to his works. Dr. B. Well then, it shall be a rapid one, as you request.-Cicero, who had waited at Brundisium, for the return of Cæsar, from the beginning of the year to the month of October, was very kindly received by that commander when he reached the shores of Italy. Returning upon this to Rome, he took no part whatever in public affairs, and only broke through the long silence which he had preserved, when rendering thanks to Cæsar for the recall of Marcellus, and defending Ligarius, and king Deiotarus.-The assassination of Cæsar took place on the 15th of March, A.U.c. 710. Although Brutus was on terms of the greatest intimacy with Cicero, he had nevertheless concealed from him the plan of the conspiracy; and yet the moment the dictator fell, raising on high his blood-stained dagger, he congratulated the Roman orator on the restoration of the republic. But the latter soon perceiving, that, instead of a mild and clement master, his country ran the risk of passing under the sway of the ambitious and profligate Antony, availed himself of the privilege of a free legation, and embarked for Greece. The representations of his friends, however, respecting the favourable state of affairs at Rome, induced him to return to Italy, and he re-entered the capital on the last day of August. From this moment to the day of his death, he set himself in opposition to the designs of Mark Antony, against whom he pronounced or published from the 2nd of September, 710, to the 22nd of April, 712, fourteen harangues, known by the name of Philippics. In order to balance the authority of Antony, Cicero favoured with all his influence the young Octavianus, who appeared attached to him, and frequently applied to him for advice. The indifference, however, if not actual contempt, which the senate displayed towards this youthful and aspiring leader, drove him eventually into a union with Antony and Lepidus. Thus the second triumvirate was formed, and one of its conditions was the head of Cicero. H. And how did Octavianus act? Dr. B. Historians2 inform us that he did not give up Cicero to the swords of Antony's hirelings, without the greatest reluctance, and only after a struggle of two days to preserve him. But all this affection for the orator was probably unreal, and only assumed for the purpose of excusing in some degree his subsequent abandonment of the aged patriot. Cicero was at his Tusculan villa, when the news of the proscription reached him, secret intelligence having been sent him by some of his friends. At first he resolved to sail for Greece, where Brutus was assembling around him the surviving followers of the party of the republic. Contrary winds, however, prevented the execution of this design, and he landed again on the Italian coast, and spent the night near Circeii, in great anxiety and irresolution. On the following day, the importunity of his domestics prevailed upon him to sail for Caieta, where he went again on shore, to repose himself in his Formian villa. 1 Ep. ad Att. 16, 7. 2 Plut. Vit. Cic. c. 46.-Vell. Paterc. 2, 66.--Sueton. Aug. 27. Here he slept soundly for several hours, when his attendants, having heard of the arrival of a party of soldiers, who were in quest of him, conveyed their aged master towards the shore, through a private part of the woods; but before they could succeed in reaching the ship, the soldiers, headed by a tribune whom Cicero had once defended in a capital cause, overtook the fugitives, and executed the bloody mandate of Antony.1 H. And was no effort made to save him on the part of his followers? Dr. B. The attendants, as soon as the soldiers appeared, prepared themselves for action, being resolved to defend their master's life at the hazard of their own; but Cicero commanded them to set down the litter in which they were conveying him, and to make no resistance." When the ruffians approached, surveying them with a look which almost drove them from their bloody purpose, he bade them execute the errand on which they were sent, and extended his neck from the litter to receive the blow. His head and hands were severed from his body, conveyed to Rome, and fixed upon the rostra, the head between the two hands, by the orders of Antony ! H. His age, my dear Doctor? Dr. B. Within one month of sixty-four. He was killed on the 7th of December, ten days after the establishment of the triumvirate.3-Shall I now proceed to delineate his character, or will you first have a brief analysis of his literary efforts? H. The latter, undoubtedly, will be the preferable course, for I shall then be better able to appreciate your delineation of the man. Dr. B. I think so myself. Now, open your Cicero, and name to me in succession the several productions of the Roman, as you will find them arranged there; I will give you a brief account of each. But, remember, only a brief one; the rest is to be supplied from your own private reading. H. I accept your terms, my dear Doctor, and will do my best to fulfil my part of the agreement.-Now, here we have, first in order, a treatise on Rhetoric, in four books, addressed to Herennius. Dr. B. Which treatise Cicero never wrote. If you ask me the name of the true author, I can only reply, that the matter is involved in utter uncertainty. You will see, by the heading, that some of the learned have ascribed it to Cornificius. This was the opinion of Aldus Manutius, Sigonius, and Muretus, who made the writer to have been Q. Cornificius, the elder, Cæsar's quæstor during the civil war. Gerard Vossius, on the other hand, contends for the younger Cornificius. Scaliger attributes the work to Gallio, a rhetorician in the time of Nero. Schütz is in favour of M. Antonius Gnipho, who was born in Gaul, A.U.C. 640, studied at Alexandria, and taught rhetoric in the house of the father of Julius Cæsar. But there are difficulties attending all these opinions, especially the last, and the point must be still left open to conjecture. It appears, however, that this work was one of the first treatises on rhetoric ever published in the Latin language, since its 1 Plut. Vit. Cic. c. 48. 2 Liv. Fragm. ap Senec. Suas. 1. Vell. Paterc. 2, 64.-Pigh. Ann. ad A.U.C. 710. author cites no previous Latin writer, and asserts that he has been the first to give Latin names to the figures of Rhetoric. The first and second books are extremely dry; the third, more engaging; and the fourth, which turns upon the three kinds of style suitable for discourses, is decidedly the best of the whole.1 H. Next comes a treatise "De Inventione Rhetorica." Dr. B. On that part of rhetoric which relates to invention. This is the work alluded to by Cicero, in the commencement of his treatise "De Oratore," as having been published by him in his youth. It is generally believed to have been written by him when twenty-four years of age, and to have originally contained four books, of which but two remain. Schütz, however, maintains that he never wrote, or at least never published, more than the two books, which we possess. In composing this work, Cicero, as far as an opinion may be ventured, would appear to have had before him notes taken from the prelections of some instructor, whom the anonymous author of the treatise addressed to Herennius had also attended. For a number of passages, in the two books "De Inventione," coincide in a very marked manner with others in the work to Herennius; unless, indeed, the author of the latter was the preceptor of Cicero.2 H. To the work on invention succeed the three dialogues "De Oratore," inscribed to his brother Quintus. Dr. B. These were written, A.U.C. 698, when Cicero, disgusted with the political dissensions of the capital, had retired during part of the summer to the seclusion of the country. The speakers in these dialogues are the orators Antonius and Crassus, (the latter of whom was attended by the young Sulpicius and Cotta, at that time the two most promising, speakers at Rome,) the eminent lawyer Scævola, and Catulus, and Julius Cæsar, (grand-uncle to the dictator,) the last two distinguished also for their eloquence, and who joined the party in the interval between the first and second dialogues. The principal part in the conversation, however, is borne by Crassus and Antonius; the former advocating, what was in fact Cicero's own opinion, that an almost universal knowledge is essentially requisite to perfection in oratory; the latter, who was a mere practical pleader, maintaining, that the various accomplishments insisted upon by Crassus, were totally distinct from the proper office and duties of a public speaker. According to him, eloquence is not an art, because it depends not on knowledge. Imitation of good models, practice, and minute attention to each particular case, are laid down by him as the true foundations of forensic eloquence; the great objects of an orator being, in the first place, to recommend himself to his clients, and then to prepossess the judges in his favour. Crassus, in reply, enters on the embellishments of rhetoric: pronunciation, elocution, harmony of periods, metaphors, 1 An account of the whole controversy may be seen in Dunlop, Rom. Lit. vol. 2, p. 366, seqq.; and in Baehr, Gesch. Rom. Lit. p. 502, seqq. 2 Dunlop, Rom. Lit. vol. 2, p. 366.-Schoell, Hist. Lit. Rom. vol. 2, p. 117. |